USPTO Patents Application 10726487

United States Patent and Trademark Office

Commissioner for Patents
United States Patent and Trademark Office
P.O. Box 1450
Alexandria, VA 22313-1450

www.uspto.gov

SCHWEGMAN, LUNDBERG & WOESSNER, P.A.
P.O. BOX 2938
MINNEAPOLIS MN 55402

MAILED

JUN O 9 2009

In re Application of
Vissa et al.

Application No.: 10/726487
Filing or 371(c) Date: 12/04/2003

OFFICE OF PETITIONS

DECISION ON
PETITION

Attorney Docket Number: 2945.004US1 :

This is a decision on the Petition for Revival of an Application for Patent Abandoned Unintentionally
Under 37 C.F.R. § 1.137(b), filed March 16, 2009.

This Petition is hereby granted .

The above-identified application became abandoned for failure to timely and properly reply to the non-
final Office action, mailed July 5, 2005. The Office action set a three (3) month period for reply, and
provided for extensions of time under 37 CFR 1.136(a). No complete and proper reply having been
received, the application became abandoned on October 6, 2005. A Notice of Abandonment was mailed
March 17, 2006.

Applicant files the present petition and Amendment in response to the Office action. The petition
satisfies the conditions for revival pursuant to the provisions of 37 CFR 1.137(b) in that (1) the reply in
the form of an Amendment is filed with the present petition; (2) the petition fee; and (3) the required
statement of unintentional delay 1 . Accordingly, the reply is accepted as having been unintentionally
delayed.

This application is being referred to Technology Center Art Unit 3742 for processing of the response to
the Office action filed with the petition in the normal course of business.

Telephone inquiries concerning this decision should be directed to the undersigned at (571) 272-3232.

/Derek L. Woods/
Derek L. Woods
Attorney

Office of Petitions

1 37 CFR 1 .137(b)(3) requires a statement that "the entire delay in filing the required reply from the due date for the reply until
the filing of a grantable petition pursuant to 37 CFR 1 . 1 37(b) was unintentional." Since the statement appearing in the petition
varies from the language required by 37 CFR 1 .137(b)(3), the statement is being construed as the required statement. Petitioner
must notify the Office if this is not a correct reading of the statement appearing in the petition.